Constitution ties gun ownership rights to militia participation

I cannot understand how people can continue to claim that the Second Amendment gives them the "right" to own guns with no obligation to belong to a "well regulated militia." That is the opening part of the Second Amendment and seems to be completely ignored when it comes to the "right" to gun ownership. Doesn't that amendment have at least some indication that the Founders intended gun owners to form some kind of trained, organized, "well regulated" militia and that was the reason their right to own weapons was not to be denied. I just don't understand how this argument can continue to go on and the first part of the amendment be ignored.

Gerard Burford

Indianapolis

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Constitution ties gun ownership rights to militia participation

I cannot understand how people can continue to claim that the Second Amendment gives them the 'right' to own guns with no obligation to belong to a '